A study to determine the degree of social physique anxiety and perceived directionality of its impact among elite female fitness athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the degree to which elite female fitness competitors experienced social physique anxiety and whether it was associated with facilitative or debilitative practices. The Social Physique Anxiety Scale (1989) and Hiscock Directionality Scale (2003) were administered during a 2003 international fitness competition held in a major Canadian city. Participants included 38 volunteers of 46 competitors. Results indicated competitors had a moderate degree of social physique anxiety (M = 2.69, SD =.87) and minimal degrees of perceived debilitation with responsibility (M = 3.50, SD = 1.10) and affect (M = 3.02, SD =.74). Debilitated affect was positively associated with increased social physique anxiety. Competitors appeared unsatisfied with their body image, desiring larger breast and less body fat, similar to the body image they perceived the judges desired. Many underwent or considered cosmetic surgery to enhance their image. The majority of participants trained primarily for physical appearance/sculpting reasons and consumed inadequate nutrition to meet their increased training volume. Forty-five percent had irregular/cessation of menstruation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".